Recently, when I was in the headlines, I came across an article advocating to cut military spending and invest more money in the field of people's livelihood.
At first glance, this seems to be a very "positive" suggestion, but if you think about it carefully, this is actually a low-level black that makes people cry and laugh.
The article mentions that many countries in the world are now trying to solve problems through diplomatic means and strengthen international cooperation and trust, so as to reduce the pressure of the arms race and thus reduce military spending. That's a beautiful thing to say, but the question is, is that really the case?
You know, the world we live in is not a peaceful paradise.
Take our surroundings as an example, there are many countries eyeing each other.
Not to mention the big countries such as the United States, Japan, South Korea, and India, even small countries such as the Philippines and Myanmar are also preparing to move. Under such circumstances, wouldn't cutting military spending be self-defeating? Isn't this a low-level hack?
Military spending is not a squandered effort, but a guarantee of national security.
Without a strong national defense, there will be no national tranquility and no so-called people's livelihood.
I also understand that people's livelihood issues are equally important. Improving people's livelihood in areas such as education, health care, and the environment, and raising people's living standards is what each of us wants to see. But that doesn't mean we have to sacrifice security for that.
The Qing Dynasty had money, but it didn't convert money into military strength, and it wasn't in the end?
I see that some people are still standing up for it, saying that people's livelihood is more important
Where is the livelihood of the people in Ukraine? Is there one? Which one is important?
Tell Lao Mei to dismantle his Ford, and I will believe this sentence
People's livelihood is built on military strength
National security is the cornerstone of people's livelihood development, if this cornerstone does not exist, the so-called people's livelihood development will only be a castle in the air!
Some people praise the beauty of the old man every day, but they don't say that the old US military spends the most in the world, and the total military expenditure of the last seven countries is the same
In fact, military spending and people's livelihood investment are not an either/or relationship.
In other words, military spending is the best livelihood of the people, without a strong national defense, no matter how good the people's livelihood is, as long as people say that a few soldiers are lost, you should flee.
Look at Palestine and understand everything.
The foundation of a strong country must be strong militarily, and the current international environment is not in a good position, and an increase in military spending is necessary to ensure national security and the normal life of the people.